2019 (10) TMI 47

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appellant Commandant, Home Guard Training, Government of Rajasthan, have got no status as an assessee. The Commandant is an employee of assessee, Government of Rajasthan and is entrusted with duties and functions under the provisions of The Rajasthan Home Guards Act, 1962. 3. Show cause notice dated 10.04.2013 was issued to the appellant alleging that they are providing 'security agency services'. Further, the show cause notice issued by the Additional Commissioner, Central Excise & Service Tax Commissionerate, alleged that the appellant has evaded service tax amounting to Rs. 33,78,236/- (Service tax Rs. 32,79,841/- + ED. Cess Rs. 65,597/- + S&H Ed. Cess Rs. 32,798/- allegedly leviable on amount received by the appellants during the pe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ager, N.C.R. Railway -2015 (39) STR 404 (All.) wherein the question before the Hon'ble High Court were- "(1) Whether the Tribunal was correct in dismissing the appeal for misjoinder of parties, in an appeal arising out of quasi-judicial proceedings (wherein the provisions of CPC are not applicable) of the Central Excise Department by incorrectly applying the judgment arising out of a suit which was in nature of pure civil proceedings? (2) Whether the Tribunal after holding the appeal to be incompetent could itself have declared/ observed that quasi-judicial proceedings of the Central Excise department to be a nullity and void when the matter could not be examined on merits at all? (3) Whether the CESTAT was right ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ility on the Union Government and not on the servants of the Union and hence the High Court was correct in holding that the Union Government was a necessary party. This principle has been subsequently followed by the Supreme Court in Chief Conservator of Forests (supra) in the following observations :- "............In lis dealing with the property of a State, there can be no dispute that the State is the necessary party and should be impleaded as provided in Article 300 of the Constitution and Section 79 of C.P.C., viz., in the name of the State/Union of India, as the case may be, lest the suit will be bad for non-joinder of the necessary party. Every post in the hierarchy of the posts in the Government set-up, from the lowest to t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t was pleased to dismiss the SLP both on the ground of delay as well as on merits. Accordingly, the learned Counsel submits that for non-joinder of necessary party - State of Rajasthan, the show cause notice is bad and accordingly the adjudicating authority had no jurisdiction to pass an adjudication order, for demand of tax etc. 7. Learned Counsel further states that even on merits, the admitted fact is that the appellant is a Police Department, doing the sovereign function to maintain public peace and order. In the present case, they have recovered cost/ fee for deploying additional police personnel, on request. Even if such security by the State is provided on cost recovery basis the same does not become taxable service as defined in ....